Mixed results in bias case against Elgin-area schools

Judge rules redistricting plan did not discriminate, but that gifted-student program did

July 12, 2013|By Matthew Walberg, Chicago Tribune reporter

A federal judge has ruled that officials at an Elgin-area school district did not discriminate against minority students by sending them to mobile classrooms, but ruled a program for gifted students was discriminatory.

The suit began in 2005 when the families of several Hispanic students alleged School District U-46's redistricting plan discriminated against their children by forcing them to attend older, overcrowded schools and portable classrooms while white students were sent to newer facilities.

The suit was eventually granted class-action status, and other alleged violations of the students' rights were added to the complaint, something U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman noted in his ruling filed on Tuesday.

"The history of this litigation is tangled and protracted, with plaintiffs shifting their claims and emphasis a number of times" during the course of the suit, Gettleman wrote. Indeed, he pointed out that the complaint that sparked the legal battle was eventually dropped by the families and their attorneys.

The ruling came after a 27-day trial that began in February 2011 and concluded in March of this year.

"Really, we prevailed on the majority of the issues in the case," said Patricia Whitten, an attorney representing the district, which is one of the largest in Illinois.

But Gettleman also found that the district's gifted program discriminated against minorities. Whitten said it centered on a special program intended to help bright grade school students whose first language is not English to transition into regular gifted classes.

She said the district must now show Gettleman how the program is currently operating and said it was not yet clear whether the board would appeal that aspect of the judge's ruling.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs could not be reached for comment.

Gettleman's ruling did not address potential damages that might be awarded or attorney's fees in the case.